Legislative Blog
J.B. Williams, J.D.
Texas Energy fund - hiding more spending Vote NO
A Blog about Power Systems
A Bit of Background
The following backgrounds help summarize the author's views on both the general topic: Texas and more specifically Power Systems as it relates to that topic.
Brief Summary of Texas
Texas is truly a Republic. There are a multitude of items that to modify the state constitution must be modified. So there are times when Constitutional amendments are on the voting ballots. While I sometimes abhor the wording, the concept that all of those legally able to vote in Texas must vote on the change is a good one. And bills in Texas are generally short, making it easier for everyone to understand.
Summary of Power Systems
Everyone thinks of Texas as just oil and gas. They do a lot of "green energy" actually. But then again "green energy" products rely heavily upon oil and gas to be manufactured. So maybe Texas is mostly oil and gas just not all of it direct.
Blog Summary
SJR93 - Proposition 7
Introduced: 5/1/23
House Passed: 5/22/23
Senate Passed: 5/28/23
Became Law:
Pages: 4
Sponsors:Hunter
The wonderful ability to have an agency approve higher fees somewhere to support this, all the while being able to claim the Legislature didn't increase fees to you. FYI - if any utility, Oncor, or others increases fees there was some government agency that permitted it. And that agency could only do so because the Legislature gave them permission to.
Texas Energy fund - hiding more spending Vote NO
Published: 2023-10-17
This would create a Constitutional Texas Energy Fund to support the construction, maintenance, modernization, and operation of electric generating facilities. This would be outside the general revenue fund.
I've already talked in Proposition 6's blog about my aversion to these separate funds. I'm not even sure I like it if there are to be no future state appropriations to the funds. It makes it harder to have oversight at the government level for how these funds are spent. And here again it's an Energy fund - who couldn't see this becoming used as a scare tactic to get more appropriations.
The more this happens the less fiscal responsible we become. This is mostly because it's hard to say you are within revenue when there are a multitude of funds outside the general revenue, and much less oversight into how their funds are spent. Yet those are still funds every Texas resident is responsible for. It would be equivalent to setting up an account for a child. Then asking them if things are going okay and they say sure. You have no insight into how the funds are spent, but if they incur overdraft you are the adult and therefore responsible.
This fund would be administered ad used, without further appropriation, by the Public Utility Commission of Texas. I foresee them raising rates to ensure they have more funding, especially if any funds invested didn't do as well. Of course, the general public will not have that knowledge, and even getting it at the Treasury level would be more challenging. But as long as they say it's to ensure the reliability or adequacy of an electric power grid in the state. The fund could administer loans and grants for eligible projects: for electric generating facilities that serve as backup power sources; and for each region in proportion to the region's load share.
The fund will consist of the following:
- money credited, appropriated or transferred to the fund by the legislature (but it says no new appropriations??);
- revenue the legislature dedicates to the fund (so these will be general revenue funds currently that are going to be diverted here for spending by non-elected with less oversight);
- returns received from investments of money in the fund;
- gifts, grants, and donations to the fund.
The reasonable expenses of managing the fund shall be paid from the fund. Guess if it's unreasonable they can ask the legislature to cover it.
The legislature can appropriate funding here. So, basically we shift this fund out of the general revenue fund so there is less oversight into spending and, therefore, less direct feedback to the general public. Further the legislature may shift certain income out of general revenue and for deposit directly into this fund. But the legislature can continue to make future appropriations to the fund. So it seems to be a free spending spree permitted because it won't be overseen by the legislature. And the legislature can still balance the budget because it can ignore money spent there. Well it can ignore it until there is less funding. But wait, since it is receiving money directly from a source - that source can increase fees to the public and thereby increase the amount available to spend. And that way the legislature can both claim high amounts of spending when it looks good and show less in spending via the budget when it looks good.
This is a horrible idea!
Webpage created by and for J.B. Williams, J.D. - all rights reserved